GEF Contributions to Agenda 21: The First Decade

G E F C O N T R I B U T I O N S

TO AGENDA 21

G l o b a l E n v i r o n m e n t F a c i l i t y

June 2000

THE FIRST DECADE

GEF

C O N T E N T S

Humanity at a Turning Point 2

Agenda 21 & the Global Environment Facility 3

GEF Responds to Agenda 21: An Overview 4

Funding the Global Environment

Actions and Early Impacts

Contributing to Agenda 21

Tackling Major Global Environmental Problems 13

Biodiversity

AtmosphereClimate ChangeOzone Depletion

WatersMarine EnvironmentFreshwater Resources

Land

Working in the Spirit of Agenda 21 29

Integrating Environment and Development

Encouraging Participation of Stakeholders and Major Social Groups

At the GrassrootsStrategic Partnerships

Enabling People to Build a Sustainable Future

Building a Supportive Broader Context

Addressing the Human Condition 42

Poverty

Health

Closing 46

Editor’s Note: This report was submitted to the United Nations in June 2000,based on December 1999 data.

Cover photo: Rio de Janeiro

H U M A N I T Y AT A T U R N I N G P O I N T

In 1992 world leaders met in Rio de Janeiro to make a majorcourse correction in earth’s future.

The need was clear. Humanity was stressing the natural safetynet on which life depends, while coming up short in assuring abasic quality of life for all people. Around the world, environ-mental degradation, consumption, and population grew, whilegaps between rich and poor widened.

The poor environmental practices of individual nations could befelt across borders and seas. Land degradation, pollution, andoverfishing seriously threatened food production, internationalwaterways, and the vast global “commons”—our oceans. Thescale of habitat destruction and irreversible loss of plant andanimal species reached alarming levels. Scientists pointed totroubling evidence of human impacts on the atmosphere and cli-mate. Local emissions of pollutants, accumulating globally, ateaway at the protective ozone layer and threatened to warm theatmosphere—posing potentially severe problems for weather,agriculture, sea levels, ecosystems, and human health.

At the U.N. Conference on Environment and Development, 178governments forged an agenda for action to set the global com-munity on a sustainable path in the 21st century. The resultingdocument was Agenda 21. Eight years later, much of its prom-ise remains unfulfilled; however, many concrete steps have beentaken to “halt and reverse the negative impacts of human behav-ior on the physical environment and promote environmentallysustainable economic development.” To a considerable degree,these steps have been fostered and funded by the GlobalEnvironment Facility (GEF).

GEF CONTRIBUTIONS TO AGENDA 21: THE F IRST DECADE 3

A G E N D A 2 1 & T H E G L O B A L E N V I R O N M E N T FA C I L I T Y

The Global Environment Facility… whose additional grant and concessional funding is designed to achieve global environmental benefits, should cover the agreed incrementalcosts of relevant activities under Agenda 21, in particular for developing countries.

—Chapter 33, Agenda 21

Recognizing the great differences among nations in resourcesand capacity, Agenda 21 challenged the international communityto find substantial new funding to help countries—particularly the least developed—to pursue sustainable develop-ment. GEF has been the primary source of this funding for theglobal environment.

GEF began operations in 1991 as a pilot facility to address glob-al environmental problems. Momentum created by the EarthSummit helped transform GEF into a truly global partnership,which today counts 166 countries as members. Its over 650projects stretch across more than 150 developing nations andcountries with economies in transition. Nearly $3 billion hasbeen allocated to these initiatives, matched by almost $8 billionmore in cofinancing.

GEF is the designated “financial mechanism” of the two princi-pal global environmental treaties to emerge from the EarthSummit—the Convention on Biological Diversity and the UnitedNations Framework Convention on Climate Change. In otherwords, GEF funding brings these two international agreementsto life. Similarly, GEF assistance is enabling the RussianFederation and nations in Central Asia and Eastern Europe tophase out the use of ozone-destroying chemicals in partnershipwith the Montreal Protocol of the Vienna Convention on OzoneLayer Depleting Substances. GEF-funded initiatives to reversethe degradation of international waters are informed by and helpto realize the objectives of a mosaic of regional and internation-al waters agreements, including new international efforts toaddress persistent toxic substances. More than 60 projects thatcut across GEF’s biodiversity, climate change, and internationalwaters programs also address land degradation, in cooperationwith the United Nations Convention to Combat Desertification.

4 GEF CONTRIBUTIONS TO AGENDA 21: THE F IRST DECADE

At two points in GEF’s history, its contributing participants haverenewed their support by replenishing the GEF Trust Fund. In1994, 34 donors pledged $2 billion over four years for a restruc-tured GEF as called for in Agenda 21. In 1998, 36 donorspledged $2.75 billion to fund GEF’s work into the new millenni-um. These funds, donated by developing and developed countriesalike, represent a substantial commitment by the world’s nationsto protect and sustainably manage biodiversity and internationalwaters, address climate change, and heal the ozone layer.

The total amount of GEF funding and cofinancing is, nonethe-less, small when compared with the scope of the task at hand.GEF, therefore, strives to leverage funds from other sources andmainstream action on the global environment into the programsof other international institutions, governments, and the privatesector.

GEF RESPONDS TO AGENDA 2 1 :A N O V E RV I E W

The United Nations Conference on Environment andDevelopment should… identify ways and means of providingnew and additional financial resources, particularly to developing countries, for environmentally sound developmentprogrammes and projects in accordance with national development objectives, priorities and plans and to considerways of effectively monitoring the provision of such new and additional financial resources, particularly to developing countries, so as to enable the international community to take further appropriate action on the basis of accurate and reli-able data…

—U.N. General Assembly Resolution 44/228

Adopted in 1994, the Instrument for the Establishment of theRestructured Global Environment Facility—GEF’s “constitu-tion”—echoes many principles of Agenda 21 and none more sothan the goal of crafting programs and projects “in accordancewith national development objectives, priorities, and plans.”


This “country-drivenness” is the linchpin to GEF’s overallefforts to ensure universal participation in all aspects of its workand transparency and democracy in its decisionmaking andoperations.1

GEF supports protection of the global environment in a sus-tainable development framework. Around the world, GEF hashelped make it possible for communities, local governments,non-governmental organizations (NGOs), and the private sectorto participate in sustainable development. Ethiopian farmers arelearning new ways to preserve genetic variability in their cropspecies. Local Bhutanese communities near Jigme Dorji NationalPark have a say in zoning and park protection. In Jordan, a localNGO partnered with local government and a cement plant topreserve the Dana Nature Reserve. Thousands of rural house-holds, health clinics, and schools in some 20 countries haveinstalled solar power systems. Whale-watch boat owners inArgentina are collaborating with conservationists to protect sen-sitive portions of Patagonia’s coastline. East European firmsmanufacturing refrigerants, foams, and other ozone-depletingsubstances have made the transition to less damaging chemicals,with technical assistance from GEF.

Broad representation in GEF’s governing structures reinforces athigher levels this emphasis on participation. Representativesfrom all 166 member states provide overall direction throughthe GEF Assembly, which meets every three years. More than athousand leaders from governments, international institutions,and non-governmental organizations participated in the firstGEF Assembly in New Delhi in 1998. GEF’s governing Councildevelops, adopts, and evaluates GEF programs; its 32 membersrepresent 16 developing country constituencies, 14 developedcountry constituencies, and 2 constituencies made up of transi-tional economies. Unique among international financial institu-tions, the GEF Council welcomes the participation of represen-tatives of non-governmental organizations in its deliberations.Other entities have looked to GEF’s Council as a model of gov-ernance and a foundation for building trust and cooperationamong the nations of the world.

GEF does not implement the projects it funds, availing itself ofthe different strengths and experience of three major interna-tional agencies: the United Nations Development Programme(UNDP), United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP),and the World Bank. In doing so, GEF streamlines its opera-tions, supplements rather than duplicates others’ efforts, and,


significantly, helps integrate global environmental concerns intothe policies and programs of these institutions. Recently, theGEF Council expanded opportunities for regional developmentbanks (the Asian Development Bank, African DevelopmentBank, European Bank of Reconstruction and Development, Inter-American Development Bank), the U.N. Food and AgricultureOrganization and the U.N. Industrial Development Organizationto help countries prepare and execute GEF projects.

GEF ensures the effectiveness of its programs, thus maximizingthe impact of the funds entrusted to it. This means developingprojects that:

■ Demonstrate a strong scientific and technical basis

■ Apply innovative or experimental approaches to solving environmental problems that can be replicatedby others

■ Mobilize considerable financial and other resources.

One of GEF’s chief strengths has been its ability to achievegreater effectiveness by internalizing lessons learned in earlierefforts. During each replenishment of financial resources, GEFhas undergone a thorough re-examination of its policies andprograms and then adjusted its programs and operationsaccordingly. Each year, GEF secretariat and implementingagency staff collaborate with GEF’s monitoring and evaluationunit to extensively review and assess the progress of projects,programs, and even entire focal areas, integrating learning intoongoing work programs.2

Funding the Global Environment

GEF’s maturing program has grown to encompass a wide arrayof projects. They fall under four focal areas—biodiversity, cli-mate change, international waters, and ozone depletion—andhave important impacts on cross-cutting issues, most notably,land degradation. Full projects in the climate change focal arearange in size from capital-intensive initiatives, such as a $35.7million project to install wind farms and photovoltaic systems inChina, down to grants as small as $900,000 for technical assis-tance to Peru’s Centre for Energy Conservation. Modest grantamounts encourage innovation, flexibility, and responsiveness,often serving as seed money at the grassroots level. GEF’s SmallGrants Programme, administered by UNDP, has directed more



than $42 million in over 1200 grants to community groups andNGOs that help rural communities develop locally appropriateand innovative solutions to protecting the natural resources onwhich they depend. One example is a Kenyan project for house-hold raising and selling of swallowtail butterfly pupae forexport. Similarly, GEF’s Small and Medium Enterprise Program,administered by IFC, channels funds through NGOs and privatecompanies to fund pioneering and replicable small businessefforts—for example, solar-powered sewing machines for tai-lors. The program also promotes the conservation of biodiversi-ty and energy conservation, such as small organic produce farmsin Poland and solar home systems in Bangladesh.

GEF-funded activities in 133 nations are steadily buildingcapacities to prepare national inventories, strategies, and actionplans in cooperation with the U.N. Framework Convention onClimate Change and the Convention on Biological Diversity. Asof March 2000, the GEF had approved 138 enabling activitiesin biodiversity and 157 in climate change, with total funding of$123 million. This assistance enables nations to assess biodiver-sity and climate change challenges from their own perspective,determine the most promising opportunities for project devel-opment, and then pursue full-scale projects with support fromthe international community.

GEF also supplies relatively small amounts of funding to helpcountries prepare and develop projects for consideration by theGEF Council. Such assistance comes in three forms: up to$25,000 for early project identification or preparation, up to$350,000 for information gathering needed to complete projectproposals and supporting documentation, and up to $1 million tocomplete technical design and feasibility work for larger projects.

The dollar amounts that GEF directs to sustainable developmentaround the world are magnified several times over by the fundsand resources it mobilizes. By 2000, funds leveraged by GEFtotaled close to $8 billion, a significant rallying of support forGEF goals from a variety of sources. The largest share—morethan $2 billion—has come as counterpart funding from recipi-ent countries. Also reckoned in the total are contributions fromGEF’s implementing agencies, other development institutions,other governments, project beneficiaries, and, increasingly, theprivate sector.

GEF also finds ways to magnify and extend the impact of grantsbeyond the life of the project. For example, GEF has supporteddevelopment of more than a dozen conservation trust funds,

including funds in Bhutan, Brazil, Mexico, Peru, Uganda, and,more recently, Suriname. Typically created and managed by pri-vate organizations and capitalized by government, donor agen-cies, and other means, these are long-term funding mechanismschiefly for biodiversity conservation. Six established funds withmeasurable operating experience have raised more than $33million in non-GEF contributions, and the projects they in turnsupport attract additional financing, often from grantee organi-zations.

The Mgahinga-Bwindi Impenetrable Forest Conservation TrustFund (a GEF/World Bank project) was established with $4.3million of GEF funds and nearly $4 million in cofinancing fromUSAID and the Netherlands. The fund created a sense of“resource security” for managers of the Bwindi ImpenetrableNational Park and Mgahinga Gorilla National Park, allowingthem to focus on improving the quality and scope of their con-servation efforts. By attracting additional resources from bilat-eral donors, the fund was able to capitalize income from theendowment, rather than spend it, strengthening the long-termsustainability of the project.

Other cutting-edge financing mechanisms are being tested at theproject level: The India Hilly Hydel project (UNDP) created arevolving fund to give soft loans to businesses and an NGO toset up demonstration hydroelectric projects. Loans are expectedto reach commercial market rates gradually as the technologygains acceptance. The same is true for GEF’s Alternate Energyproject (World Bank), also in India, which provides low-interestloans to wind farm developers. The China Renewable EnergyPromotion project (World Bank) takes a different tack forfinancing wind farms. It prepares pre-investment feasibilitystudies for potential wind farm sites to attract private invest-ment through commercial banks. In Mauritania, a GEF project(UNDP) provides low-interest financing directly to local enter-prises to install and maintain small decentralized wind electricequipment. The project also established long-term financing ofrural electrification using a specialized wind equipment financecompany, a standard credit mechanism for project developers,and Islamic lease finance.


Actions and Early Impacts

GEF’s dollar investments only have meaning when consideredalongside action on the ground. GEF projects engage the partic-ipation and talent of a range of local stakeholders and partners—from local governments and businesses to national and localNGOs. NGOs execute as much as 20 percent of GEF projects interms of grant dollars. Academia and the scientific communityare also counted among GEF’s local partners. In addition, GEFcapacity-building courses, workshops, exchanges, and studytours have trained many thousands of professionals, many ofwhom go on to become effective local partners in GEF’s and oth-ers’ efforts for sustainable development. There are numerousexamples in the climate change portfolio alone: the KenyanAssociation of Manufacturers was trained in energy managementand efficiency; independent power producers in Sri Lanka weretrained to conduct feasibility studies and undertake renewableenergy projects; and the Peruvian Center for EnergyConservation learned to improve the advice and support it pro-vides to public and private industrial clients on energy efficiencyand conservation savings. (UNDP)

Global environmental problems require long-term efforts tosolve, and GEF is positioned to stay the course. Many of its pro-grams and projects will only prove their worth over the longterm. Nonetheless, GEF can point to concrete indicators ofprogress and results to date:

Ozone-depleting substances. Chief among these is GEF’s antici-pated successful conclusion of its program to reduce use ofozone-depleting substances (ODS). Since 1991, GEF has assisted14 transitional economies of central and eastern Europe and theformer Soviet Union in phasing out these materials, as mandatedby the Montreal Protocol. GEF funding exceeded $138 million.3

As a result, consumption of ozone-depleting substancesdecreased by 90 percent—from 190,000 tons of “ozone deple-tion potential” (ODP) in the late 1980s to less than 15,000 ODPtons in 1997, with a similar drop-off in production. Central andeastern European countries have completed the transition toozone-friendly technologies, and Russia, a major source of ODSsfor other countries, is working to phase out all ODS in the year2000. This will increase pressure on other countries that still con-sume small quantities. (World Bank, UNDP, UNEP)


A GEF-commissioned study of its ODS program by an outsideevaluator concluded that GEF had “played a crucial role in thephase-out process in these countries, not only by providingmuch needed financial assistance, but by making available tech-nical expertise, supporting learning and dissemination of projectlessons within countries and regionally, and assisting in estab-lishing suitable legal frameworks.”4

Market transformation and greenhouse gas emissions reduction.A growing portfolio of more than 40 renewable energy and ener-gy efficiency projects has likewise yielded early measurable resultsfor GEF’s climate change program. The program as a wholeaims to remove barriers and lower costs so as to influence com-mercial markets toward climate-friendly technologies. Twenty-one GEF-financed projects in 20 countries are providing off-gridsolar photovoltaic energy to outlying rural areas, eliminating theneed to burn candles, kerosene, or liquid propane, or to chargebatteries. GEF projects in Argentina, Cape Verde, China, CostaRica, India, Mauritania, and Sri Lanka with wind power com-ponents also promise to reduce energy use that contributes toclimate change.

Market transformation in support of energy conservation hasalso been a major focus of the GEF, with lessons learned in ear-lier projects informing subsequent initiatives. For example,Mexico’s High Efficiency Lighting project (World Bank) suc-cessfully replaced more than 1.7 million incandescent bulbs intwo cities with compact fluorescent light bulbs (CFLs), avoidingcarbon dioxide emissions of 764,000 tons over a six-year peri-od. GEF’s Poland Efficiency Lighting project (IFC) sold morethan 1.22 million CFLs over three years, directly avoiding car-bon dioxide emissions of 519,700 tons at a cost of $7.48/ton.Five manufacturers, including a domestic Polish manufacturer,participated in an innovative subsidy program with joint manu-facturer and GEF contributions. CFL sales rose in Poland atmore than double the rate in the rest of Central and EasternEurope, with prices declining by more than 34 percent. The finalevaluation of the program links GEF activities with associatedavoided carbon dioxide emissions of 2,755,000 tons at a cost ofjust $1.41/ton.

Potential reductions in greenhouse gas emissions from ongoingGEF projects in the climate change focal area promise to be con-siderable. The Hungary Energy Efficiency Cofinancing program(World Bank) expects total direct greenhouse gas emissionreductions over the fund’s expected life to fall somewhere


between 750,000 and 1 million tons of carbon dioxide. Thoseexpected from the Leyte-Luzon Geothermal project (WorldBank) in the Philippines could reach as much as 120 million tonsof carbon dioxide emissions over the next 25 years. GEF hasapproved 440 megawatts of geothermal electricity projects,about half of the 1,100 megawatts installed worldwide from1991 to 1996.

Biodiversity. Some 350 GEF biodiversity projects are approach-ing the conservation and sustainable use of biodiversity in a vari-ety of ways: for example, creating and strengthening protectedareas, promoting sustainable use of forest products, identifyingalternative livelihoods for communities near important habitats,supporting local eco-tourism initiatives, and conserving thediversity of crop species in the wild. Sixty three GEF projects in75 countries combine policy reforms with on-the-ground forestconservation activities. These and 275 more projects protectingother ecosystems (arid and semi-arid lands, coastal and marine,and mountain lands) harbor millions of species of plants andanimals, many unknown to science. The parameters of ecosys-tems conserved or sustainably managed through GEF projectsare sometimes difficult to discern; however, one recent studyfound that 19 of 34 projects addressing protected area manage-ment potentially affect an area of nearly 117,000 square miles.The potential beneficiaries of just 10 of the 34 projects are anestimated 2 million people.

GEF has also provided $123 million in enabling activities to 127countries for meeting their obligations under the Convention onBiological Diversity. These nations have inventoried their biodi-versity, developed action plans and strategies for conservationand sustainable use, and reported the results to the convention.A recent monitoring and evaluation study of GEF’s biodiversityenabling activities found that most supported worthwhile andcost-effective national biodiversity planning processes thatresulted in well-informed and impressive strategies with reason-able assessments of current biodiversity status and trends.

Unexpected and broader impacts. One clue to GEF’s potentialfor impact on the global environment are actions—sometimesunforeseen—taken by other bodies during or after a successfulGEF project. Although it is sometimes difficult to know whetherlater positive developments are directly linked to a project, GEFhas recorded a number of unexpected impacts:


For instance, donors have been known to come on board aftera project has started, attracted by the goals or initial success ofthe project. This was the case for GEF’s Program for SustainableForestry (UNDP) in Guyana, which gained considerable cofi-nancing from other donors not calculated in the original pro-ject’s budget. In other cases, GEF projects have moved countriesto action: GEF’s South Pacific Biodiversity project (UNDP) ledthe island nation of Tonga to withdraw its support for renewedwhaling. Initial GEF discussions about Costa Rica’s wind powerpotential brought local private investment to the table, beforeGEF funds were allocated. A project in the Seychelles resulted ina moratorium on turtle harvesting.

Replicability elsewhere of project success is a major goal of GEFprojects, although it can never be guaranteed. In the case of theMexican efficient lighting project mentioned above, project suc-cess convinced the Mexican government to expand energy effi-ciency efforts to other locations and sectors, which will lead toeven greater reductions in greenhouse gas emissions. The Coal-Bed Methane project (World Bank) in China led the ChineseMinistry of Coal to negotiate joint exploration agreements withseveral multinational companies. The Asian Development Bankand Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation have developed coal-bedmethane projects in China using GEF’s model. Another Chineseproject on nature reserve management that restructured forestryenterprises has become a model elsewhere in China on resolvingland-use conflicts (World Bank). The Cuba Sabana-Camagueyproject developed construction guidelines that minimize environ-mental impacts and safeguard biodiversity that are being usedelsewhere in the region (UNDP).


Contributing to Agenda 21

Agenda 21’s forty chapters cover four major aspects of sustain-able development: social and economic dimensions, conservationand management of natural resources, strengthening the role ofmajor groups, and the means for implementation. As the follow-ing pages demonstrate, GEF’s comprehensive program anddiverse projects resonate to the principal themes of Agenda 21 by:

■ Tackling major global environmental problems, whileimpacting, either directly or as a side benefit, a varietyof important local environmental concerns

■ Working in the spirit of Agenda 21, using approachesthat promote sustainable development, while maintain-ing values that promote equity and fairness

■ Addressing the human condition, because many socialconcerns represent the human impacts of environmentalproblems or because the quality of people’s lives simplycannot be ignored while solving environmental problems.

TA C K L I N G M A J O R G L O B A LE N V I R O N M E N TA L P R O B L E M S

Agenda 21 lays out priorities for the development and the con-servation of natural resources. These are readily grouped underfour broad categories: biodiversity, atmosphere, waters, andland. GEF’s program makes a strong effort in each.

Biodiversity

Our planet’s essential goods and services depend on the variety and variability of genes, species, populations, andecosystems… The current decline in biodiversity is largely the result of human activity and represents a serious threat to human development.



Earth’s diverse species of plants and animals and the habitatsthat support them form a backdrop to human life not to betaken for granted. Genetic resources, species, and ecosystemsprovide new foods, medicines, and other useful products, not tomention much of the pleasure we receive from the naturalworld. Loss of biodiversity, however, is irreversible, diminishesthe resilience of life on Earth, and profoundly impacts peoplethe world over.

Agenda 21 seeks “to improve the conservation of biologicaldiversity and the sustainable use of biological resources, as wellas to support the Convention on Biological Diversity.”5 Relatedthemes include combating deforestation and desertification;managing fragile ecosystems, such as mountainsides, deserts,and small islands; promoting sustainable agriculture and ruraldevelopment; and assuring environmentally sound managementof biotechnology. As the leading multilateral institution address-ing threats to biodiversity and the financing mechanism for theConvention on Biological Diversity, GEF is helping to realizethese priorities.

Biodiversity is a high priority for GEF, in terms of both dollaramounts and numbers of projects. Representing roughly 40 per-cent of total funds allocated, GEF has supplied over $1.02 bil-lion for 345 projects in 120 countries. Cofinancing of $1.7 bil-lion has been attracted from other international agencies,national and local governments, project beneficiaries, and theprivate sector. This means that, since its inception, GEF hassteered nearly $3 billion toward the protection and sustainableuse of Earth’s remaining biological heritage.

GEF maintains close working relationships with the Conventionon Biological Diversity, implementing agencies with extensiveties to developing countries, and its own network of national and NGO contacts around the world. Broad repre-sentation in its governing structure provides it unique access to policymakers and civil society and opportunities to fostercooperation among governments, international organizations,the scientific and technical community, and NGOs.

GEF classifies its work in biodiversity within four general cate-gories: arid and semiarid zones; coastal, marine, and freshwaterresources; forests; and mountains. Each of GEF’s biodiversityprojects address one or more of Agenda 21’s mandates:


Conservation of biological diversity. GEF projects help conservebiodiversity in a variety of ecosystems: forests (63 projects),coastal, marine, and freshwater environments (50 projects),semi-arid areas (27 projects), and mountains (16 projects). Since1994, GEF has tripled its funding for both forest and waters-related biodiversity projects.

South Africa’s Cape Peninsula mountain chain at the southerntip of Africa outranks most in its degree of plant diversity.Encompassing an entire plant kingdom (the Cape FloralKingdom) in 188 square miles, the peninsula is threatened byuncontrolled invasive species and inadequately supported visitorfacilities and management. GEF’s Cape Peninsula BiodiversityConservation project (World Bank) has begun preparing a com-prehensive strategic plan for the entire Cape Floral Kingdom,including the eradication of alien species.

Patagonia’s 1,800-mile coastline provides important habitat fordiverse and highly interdependent wildlife, including endan-gered right whales, elephant seals, and Magellanic penguins.The area also supports the world’s fastest growing commercialfishery and nascent wildlife-based tourism. How to balance eco-nomic growth in the region with conservation of its livingresources was the focus of GEF’s Patagonia Coastal ZoneManagement Plan project (UNDP). Cooperation among a com-plex assortment of federal and provincial governments, the pri-vate sector, research institutions, NGOs, and local stakeholdersculminated in a scientifically strategic framework for investmentand technical assistance to conserve biodiversity in threeprovinces. The project has gained agreement from local fishersand whale-watch boat owners to use the area without harmingits long-term potential.

Forest conservation and management. The earth’s forest man-tle provides immeasurable natural services to humankind.Even beyond genetic diversity and the obvious supply of timberand other forest products, forests protect water resources and playa role in moderating local weather and global climate change.

Forests are the chief focus of GEF’s biodiversity portfolio, rep-resenting a cumulative total of $405 million in funding since1991. This portfolio follows the guidance of the Convention onBiological Diversity. The bulk of these projects has been imple-mented by the World Bank, which has provided $181 million in cofinancing. Forty-four countries have benefited from GEF-World Bank collaborations to conserve and sustainably manage


forests and develop forest resources to offset climate change. Formany of these countries, GEF funding for global benefits wasinstrumental in persuading them to borrow funds to conservetheir forest biodiversity.

GEF’s Conservation of Biodiversity in the Chocó Region project(UNDP) in Colombia is, in many respects, a model GEF forestinitiative. While working to conserve broad regions of tropicalhabitat, this and many other GEF projects also support Agenda21 goals for the sustainable use of resources and rural develop-ment. The Chocó is a region of great plant and animal diversi-ty, as well as severe poverty. Rates of deforestation and unsus-tainable resource use are high. After building excellent inter-institutional coordination and genuine community participa-tion, the project devised a development strategy based on soundscience and forest management that will assure conservation ofthe region’s renowned biodiversity, while promoting sustainableuses of forest products for local people.

Managing fragile ecosystems: mountains, deserts, and smallislands. Agenda 21 notes that fragile ecosystems have uniquefeatures and resources that often transcend national boundaries.A number of GEF projects acknowledge their importance aswell as address other conservation concerns.

The drylands that cover about one third of the world’s terrestri-al surface are home to a billion people and countless otherspecies who depend on natural resources for their survival. Forinstance, one GEF project is working to protect Jordan’s DanaReserve, with 20 percent of the nation’s native floral species andAzraq Oasis, critical wetland habitat supporting migratory birdsand breeding and wintering wildfowl. Unsustainable use ofDana Reserve’s resources and industrial development threatenedits biodiversity. Extraction of water from Azraq for urban andagricultural use endangered vital drinking and irrigation water.GEF’s Conservation of the Dana and Azraq Protected AreasProject (UNDP) instigated a range of interventions strengthen-ing local institutions, involving stakeholders, and building pub-lic awareness.

Of the 785 million hectares worldwide of declared protectedareas, some 260 million hectares are in mountains. GEF’sMountain Areas Conservancy project (UNDP) focuses on thevaried biodiversity and ecological landscapes of several moun-tain ranges in northern Pakistan. Its principal approach hasbeen to empower local communities to manage biodiversity


themselves. The project has helped them establish four wildlifeconservancies representing several biogeographic zones of thehigh mountains. Their habitats and species will be tapped sus-tainably for local benefit. Already revenues from controlledhunting is funding conservation efforts and improved quality oflife, for example, by bringing clean drinking water to a villagefrom a nearby glacier.

Promoting sustainable agriculture and rural development. Othertypes of GEF projects are guiding local people to a sustainablefuture and preserving biodiversity in the productive landscape.Farmers in Ethiopia, for example, are benefiting from GEF’sDynamic Farmer-Based Approach to Conservation of AfricanPlant Genetic Resources project (UNDP). This effort is improv-ing on-site conservation of agricultural biodiversity by conduct-ing research, training farmers and extension agents, building sixcommunity gene banks, and identifying incentives for conserva-tion. The project has secured seed sources for local farmers andimproved seed selection and management, while making a rangeof genetic material available to agriculture elsewhere in theworld. GEF is initiating a new operational program in agrobio-diversity to expand the number of similar projects in its portfolio.

Environmentally sound management of biotechnology.Recently, GEF became the financial mechanism for a new inter-national agreement on biosafety (the Cartagena Protocol onBiosafety). Its Pilot Project on Biosafety, implemented by UNEP,is assessing what capacity developing countries need to regulateand manage risks associated with biotechnology. Seventeencountries have received assistance in developing their nationalbiosafety frameworks.

Atmosphere

Chapter 9 of Agenda 21 concerns protection of the atmosphere.Prominent among its priorities and a top GEF concern is sus-tainable energy development and efficiency. Other mandates rel-evant to GEF’s program include more effective design and man-agement of traffic and transport systems, and replacing chloro-fluorocarbons (CFCs) and other ozone-depleting substanceswith appropriate substitutes. GEF’s climate change and ozone depletion focal areas fund projects that help fulfillthese priorities.


GEF organizes its work on climate change in three operational categories to:

■ Remove barriers to energy efficiency and energy conservation

■ Promote the adoption of renewable energy by removingbarriers and reducing implementation costs

■ Reduce the long-term costs of low greenhouse gas-emitting energy technologies.

Climate Change

The need to control atmospheric emissions of greenhouse gasesand other gases and substances will increasingly need to bebased on efficiency in energy production, transmission, distribu-tion, and consumption, and on growing reliance on environ-mentally sound energy systems, particularly new and renewablesources of energy.


GEF has built a strong, long-term program to help countriesreduce their emissions of greenhouse gases and provide cleanenergy for development through renewable and efficient energy.As a financial mechanism for the U.N. Framework Conventionon Climate Change and the single largest multilateral financer ofprojects addressing climate change, GEF works to build sus-tainable commercial markets, leverage financing from publicand private sources, and facilitate the spread of technology. Itsprogress has been substantial, and early results are promising.GEF strategies continue to evolve, building on lessons learnedand best practices from around the world.

Climate change projects represent roughly 36 percent of GEF’stotal allocations since 1991. GEF has funded 227 initiativesthrough grants totaling $884 million, most of which went to 94major projects. The greatest share of grants supported theremoval of barriers to cost-effective renewable energy technolo-gies, such as solar, wind, and geothermal energy. Removal ofbarriers to energy efficiency received the second largest slice offunds, followed by commercialization of new technologies. GEFfinancing for climate change projects has leveraged more than$4.9 billion in cofinancing from government counterpart insti-tutions, bilateral donors, and local communities.


Promoting sustainable development through renewable energy.Many opportunities exist to introduce renewable energy sourcesand technologies in developing countries where more than twobillion people still lack access to electricity. GEF projects are designed to remove barriers to realizing theseopportunities as well as reducing their costs. Strong emphasis isplaced on market development so that renewable energy willexpand through private initiative. GEF’s work in renewableenergy has shown particularly visible results.

Solar power. Since 1991, GEF has funded 21 off-grid solar pho-tovoltaic (PV) projects in 20 countries. Four more are underpreparation. These promise to install as many as 1 million sys-tems in the next few years.

■ Under GEF’s Small and Medium Scale EnterpriseProgram (IFC), three PV home system businesses (inBangladesh, Dominican Republic, and Vietnam) haveinstalled more than 6,000 systems under different business models.

■ GEF’s Photovoltaic Market Transformation Initiative(IFC) will support private sector investment to expandthe market and use of photovoltaics in Egypt, India,Kenya, Mexico, and Morocco.

■ A partnership with the International FinanceCorporation has helped launch the Renewable Energyand Energy Efficiency Fund (REEF) for developingcountries and economies in transition. REEF is expectedto make investments in commercial renewable energyand energy efficiency projects with GEF co-financingavailable for smaller and riskier projects. The net effectis to attract private investments several times the GEF contribution.

■ Thanks to GEF and its partners in Sri Lanka, 500 ruralhouseholds previously without power now light theirhomes and run small appliances using solar home sys-tems. The project is supplying financing to Sarvodaya, anational microfinance institution, which lends funds toconsumers to buy the systems from local suppliers(World Bank).


■ A project approved in 1999 for the Philippines isexploring the potential for the use of photovoltaic energysystems at hydro sites to eliminate the need for energystorage and provide a reliable source of power. Thiscombination has the potential to create demand forthousands of megawatts of photovoltaics, an enormousincrease in the current market, and shows promise forreplication elsewhere (World Bank/IFC). Similar projectsin Morocco and India are demonstrating the economicand technical feasibility of merging PVs with combined-cycle natural gas thermal power generation.

■ GEF is supporting solar thermal technology in India,Mexico, and Morocco.

Wind, biomass, and geothermal. Projects in India, Mauritius,Costa Rica, and elsewhere are showing solid results in thesealternative energy sources:

■ The India Alternate Energy project led the IndiaRenewable Energy Development Agency (IREDA) tofinance and commission 270 megawatts of wind power,41 of which were commissioned by GEF and the WorldBank’s International Development Association and 10with Danish funds. By project end, the number of windpower suppliers grew from three to 26, many with for-eign partners, helping to reduce the installed costs ofwind turbines.

■ The Mauritius Sugar Bio-Energy project (World Bank)indirectly catalyzed dramatic changes in electricity gen-eration in the country. Electricity generated from sugarbagasse (wastes) increased by 168 percent from 1992 to1996. Several sugar mills have now made their owninvestments in bagasse power generation, separatelyfrom the project.

■ The Costa Rica Tejona Wind Power project (WorldBank/InterAmerican Development Bank) encouragedthe emergence of a significant wind power industry, evenbefore the project had installed its own demonstrationwind turbines. Other countries in Central America haveshown interest in the Costa Rican experience.

Fuel switching and production/recovery. GEF wishes to demon-strate the commercial and technical viability of switching fromcoal to gas fuels and fuel production and recovery. Of 15 proj-ects approved, four are near completion or completed: bio-


methanation in India (UNDP); gas production in Sichuan,China (World Bank); coal-bed methane capture, also in China(UNDP); and coal-to-gas switching in Poland (World Bank). Allfour have shown significant progress and impacts are being reg-istered. For instance, conservation under the Sichuan project hasincreased gas recovery by 10 to 20 percent and gas reserves by70 billion cubic meters.

Renewable Energy Partnership. In 1999 GEF and the WorldBank formed the Renewable Energy Partnership. This strategicpartnership will direct funds to support long-term policy andinvestment in renewable energy as well as to take advantage ofsudden private sector opportunities meeting certain pre-agreedcriteria. The partnership will also promote policy tools support-ing grid-connected renewable energy in developing countries andcountry-based intermediaries to identify and appraise projects.

Promoting sustainable development through energy efficiency. Energy efficiency provides “win-win” opportunities—reducing greenhouse gas emissions, while, for instance, loweringelectrical bills in buildings or saving people long daily searchesfor fuelwood. GEF has targeted a number of barriers that haveprevented people from better conserving energy as well asswitching to more efficient energy.

For instance, a GEF project promoting efficient refrigerators inChina (UNDP) addresses key market, technological, social, andcommercial barriers that Chinese manufacturers face in adopt-ing technology to make highly efficient refrigerators. A similarGEF project (World Bank) focuses on increasing the efficiency ofindustrial boilers. GEF’s chiller projects in Thailand has usedguarantees and other non-grant financing to address risks with-out subsidizing cost-effective technologies. Similar approachesare being applied in energy efficiency projects in Hungary and,most recently, Poland.

GEF’s Poland Efficient Lighting project (World Bank/IFC) pro-vides the best evidence of how a project can transform a market.The project sought to encourage the use of compact fluorescentlamps (CFLs) through direct subsidies, improved distributionchannels, product promotion, and consumer and professionaleducation. The project sold 1.22 million CFLs, directly resultingin savings of 436 gigawatt hours and avoiding 519,700 tons ofcarbon dioxide emissions. Prices of the bulbs declined in Poland.More important, foreign CFL manufacturers have been attract-


ed to the Polish market, and more retailers carry the bulbs intheir stores. GEF has funded similar projects in Mexico,Jamaica, and elsewhere.

Promoting sustainable development in transportation. Agenda21 specifically targets the transportation sector as a means tolower pollution and emissions harmful to people’s health andthe atmosphere. In 1999 GEF launched a new operational pro-gram on transport. Among its emphases will be shifts to moreefficient and less-polluting forms of public and freight trans-portation, nonmotorized transport, fuel cell or battery-operatedvehicles of various kinds, internal combustion engine/electrichybrid buses, and conversion of biomass feedstock to liquidfuel. The GEF Council recently approved projects to promotefuel cell buses in Brazil and to support bikeways for suburbanManila.

Ozone Depletion

…the total chlorine loading of the atmosphere with ozone-depleting substances has continued to rise. This can be changedthrough compliance with the control measures identified withinthe [Montreal] Protocol.


Most every year, evidence of people’s ability to impact globalsystems appears over the Antarctic and Arctic in the form ofozone holes in the atmosphere—despite the fact that much ofthe developed world has abandoned the use of ozone-depletingsubstances (ODS), such as chlorofluorocarbons. With a drop inworldwide ODS emissions, scientists are hopeful that the ozonelayer will now repair itself, but, to be certain, it has been impor-tant that all nations comply with the Montreal Protocol.Developing nations have looked to the Montreal ProtocolMultilateral Fund for the financial assistance to phase out thesechemicals. Nations in central and eastern Europe and the formerSoviet Union also have had a difficult time making the transi-tion, but with GEF assistance they are succeeding.

GEF allocated nearly $148.5 million to cover the incrementalcosts of phasing out ODS in fourteen economies in transition.Projects for three countries are still in the pipeline. As mentionedearlier, ODS use has decreased by 90 percent since GEF’s ODSprogram began. Most GEF ozone activities will be completedbefore 2001.


Slovenia made good use of GEF funds to phase out ODS use. In1993 the country consumed 1,923 metric tons of ODS, chieflyin the aerosol, foam, solvent, and refrigerant sectors. Sloveniacommitted itself to the phase-out process and identified key pol-icy and regulatory measures that would minimize disruption tothese industrial sectors. The project provided technical assis-tance to seven enterprises on converting to non-ODS and facili-tated cooperation among government institutions and ODSconsumers. As a result, key ministries were strengthened,demand for ODSs was reduced, and the economic costs of thephase out were lowered. In the end, the project helped Sloveniaphase out 345 metric tons of ODS use per year and indirectlyhelped phase out nearly 1,600 additional metric tons.

GEF financial, technical, and policy assistance played a crucialrole in phasing out ODSs in this region. GEF also helped dis-seminate lessons learned elsewhere in the countries or region.Success also derived from the domestic commitment shown bythe nations involved, careful integration of sectoral and prob-lem-specific activities into nationwide plans and policies, andstrong collaboration among GEF’s implementing agencies.

Waters

Water is the basis for life, but we often show little respect for it;pollution, depletion of once ample fisheries, draw down offreshwater resources, and invasive species have diminished ouroceans and waterways. Agenda 21 asks nations to remedy andprevent these and other problems, addressing issues of themarine and freshwater environments in separate chapters.

GEF has become the largest single multilateral funder for sus-tainable water management around the world. Its internationalwaters focal area tackles both marine and freshwater environ-mental problems through a broad ranging program that hassupplied more than $329 million or 14 percent of total alloca-tions since 1991. These funds have supported more than 100projects in 131 nations. Additional financing mobilized fromother sources has totaled $476 million over the same period.Over the next five years, the GEF will double its financial sup-port to water and related land resources to more than one-halfbillion dollars.


Three broad categories classify GEF’s work:

■ Water-body based. This program addresses high prioritytransboundary environmental problems that seriouslythreaten water bodies: pollution, wetland loss, overfish-ing, and excessive water withdrawal

■ Integrated land and water. This program addresses thedegradation of or further damage to biodiversity-richecosystems that cross borders

■ Contaminant based. This program works to overcomebarriers to best practices that limit contamination ofinternational waters.

GEF’s success in these areas has been marked by a high degreeof coordination and collaboration among governments, devel-opment assistance agencies, and donors and commitment to thetask of national environment-related sectors and governmentinstitutions. The long-term nature of GEF funding has also fac-tored into the equation.

Marine Environment

The marine environment—including the oceans and all seas andadjacent coastal areas—forms an integrated whole that is anessential element of the global life-support system and a positiveasset that presents opportunities for sustainable development.


Chapter 17 in Agenda 21 covers the protection of oceans, seas,and coastal areas, including protection, rational use, and devel-opment of their living resources. It advocates, among others, theintegrated management and sustainable development of coastalareas, protection of the marine environment, and sustainableuse and conservation of marine living resources in both the highseas and under national jurisdiction. Also emphasized is the sus-tainable development of small island nations.

A good illustration of GEF work in protecting the marine envi-ronment through integrated management is its BuildingPartnerships for the Environmental Protection and Managementof the East Asian Seas project (UNDP). The two phases of thisproject have garnered $23.8 million from the GEF to prevent andmanage marine pollution at demonstration sites at Xiamen,China; Batangas Bay, Philippines; and the Malucca Straits. Elevencountries participated in what has turned out to be a model ofcooperative policy development among stakeholders. The project


trained more than 300 professionals and enhanced waste man-agement. China went on to approve comprehensive marine man-agement legislation. A strategic environmental management andaction plan now guides stakeholders in Batangas Bay.

GEF supports integrated coastal management projects inPatagonia (Argentina), Belize, the Red Sea, Georgia, Ghana, andthe Gulf of Guinea in Africa, among others. These often overlapwith GEF’s focus on biodiversity conservation.

The coastal zone of Belize in Central America is among the rich-est in marine biodiversity in the world. This small country alsoboasts the largest barrier coral reef in the Atlantic Ocean.Thousands of people rely on a healthy coastal zone through jobsand earnings in fishing and tourism. The watershed supportsproduction of key crops, such as sugar cane and fruit. GEF’sproject is developing and strengthening the Government ofBelize’s capacity for coastal zone management and is intended todemonstrate the economic benefits of balancing environmentalprotection with development (UNDP).

Small islands are subject to many threats, including marine pol-lution, coastal habitat degradation, and, most recently, sea levelrise associated with a warming climate. GEF addresses theirconcerns through several projects. For instance, a GEF projecthelped the Small Island Developing States of the Pacific to pre-pare a strategic action program on land-based sources of marinepollution, coastal habitat conservation, fisheries, and watershedmanagement (UNDP).

Freshwater Resources

Freshwater resources are an essential component of the Earth’shydrosphere and an indispensable part of all terrestrial ecosystems.


Nearly every freshwater body in the world is vulnerable to pol-lution, threatening fisheries, human health, and sources of waterfor drinking and industrial use. Freshwater is so vital to societiesthat disputes over limited water supplies have raised tensionsand created conflicts. Agenda 21 focuses on protecting the qual-ity and supply of freshwater resources. Among other things, itlooks to nations to apply integrated approaches to developing,managing, and using water, while protecting water resources,water quality, and aquatic ecosystems.


GEF funds are bringing together nations that share access toimportant waterways so that they can agree on a commonapproach to sustainable use and development. GEF river basinprojects are now ongoing for the Danube, Nile, São Francisco(Brazil), Bermejo (Argentina/Bolivia), and Mekong (SoutheastAsia) rivers, among others. Various aspects of lake-based water-sheds, such as Lake Victoria, Tanganyika, and Chad in Africa;Lake Ohrid, shared by Albania and Macedonia; and LakeManzala in Egypt, are also subjects of GEF projects.

The lessons learned in GEF’s Developing the Danube RiverBasin Pollution Reduction Program (UNDP) advanced develop-ment of other GEF freshwater projects. Linked by this river andthe Black Sea, into which it flows, sixteen nations collaboratedover six years on a strategic action plan. They identified 500pollution “hotspots,” matching them with the policy, institu-tional, and legal reforms needed to clean them up. The nationsalso agreed to support installation of clean technology to reduceorganic and toxic discharges by 30 percent, nitrogen pollutionby around 14 percent, and phosphorus pollution by 27 percentin the next decade. A similar GEF project is now working toreplicate this success in the nearby Dnieper river basin.

Newer projects (both UNEP) in Brazil’s São Francisco andArgentina/Bolivia’s Bermejo river basins are taking steps to emulate the Danube success. As large as the Danube system, theSão Francisco traverses five states in northeastern Brazil and is subject to the environmental demands of mining, irrigation,hydropower, and urban water supply sectors. GEF’s project ishelping the government implement a new national water law,including a system of pricing for water use, as well as other policy reforms. In Argentina and Bolivia, a GEF-supported project is attempting to address erosion and sedimentation thatis hampering sustainable development and producing environ-mental headaches downstream. The project is involving allstakeholders—from communities to the national government—in an extensive collaboration to improve soil conservation andwatershed management that is being integrated with existingcommunity, municipal, and provincial programs.


Land

Expanding human requirements and economic activities areplacing ever increasing pressures on land resources, creatingcompetition and conflicts and resulting in suboptimal use ofboth land and land resources… it is now essential to resolvethese conflicts and move towards more effective and efficient useof land and its natural resources.


A number of ancient civilizations are thought to have declinedand disappeared due to poor land resource management. Today,36 African countries are jeopardized by dryland degradation ordesertification; worldwide the impacts of land degradationaffect as many as 110 nations.

Agenda 21 promotes the integrated planning and managementof land resources. Chapter 10 recommends strengthening deci-sionmaking structures specifically to put such efforts into place.Related themes are combating desertification and drought, pro-moting sustainable agriculture, and combating deforestation. Infact, land degradation is a cross-cutting theme in its pages aswell as in GEF’s work.

GEF has completed or launched more than 60 major projectswith components relating to land degradation. GEF funds sup-porting them total $350 million, and cofinancing has addedmore than twice that amount.

In fiscal 1999, the GEF Council called for a new approach todefining links between land degradation and GEF’s priority pro-grams. GEF has an action plan and timetable for increasing itssupport for land degradation activities.

GEF pays substantial attention to preventing land degradationthat harms biodiversity. Thirty-nine biodiversity projects havemajor components addressing this problem. An additional 21projects overlap with land degradation components in climate change (biomass renewable energy) and internationalwaters (watersheds, wetlands, and so on) projects. All theseefforts are working to conserve habitats of endemic and endan-gered species of flora and fauna under pressure from loss of veg-etative cover and soil depletion. Examples of such projects canbe found in the Comoros Islands, Burkina Faso, Ethiopia,Lebanon, Madagascar, Mauritania, Mauritius, Mongolia,Senegal, Uruguay, and elsewhere.


Along the border between Senegal and Mauritania, a GEF proj-ect is working to get at the root causes of biodiversity loss byrehabilitating degraded land. Specifically, it is improving tech-niques to restore five degraded upland and floodplain ecosys-tems in arid and semiarid areas. Other measures includestrengthening fire prevention and suppression and creatingincreased incentives for local people to earn their incomes sus-tainably (UNDP/UNEP).

Contributions to greenhouse gas emissions can come fromburning fuelwood, slash and burn agriculture, and other landuses. Solar power and other renewable energies can take theplace of less climate-friendly sources, while protecting land-scapes for future generations. For example, a GEF project inLao PDR is encouraging use of energy from micro-hydro mini-grids and solar battery charging (World Bank). GEF projectspursue climate change goals, while significantly reducing landdegradation. As discussed above, GEF projects that focus onthe conservation and management of forests by their verynature prevent degradation of land resources, while offsettingclimate change.

In Benin, GEF’s Village-Based Management of Woody Savannaand Establishment of Woodlots for Carbon Sequestration proj-ect helped local people near three protected forest areas switchto energy-saving cook stoves and sustainable multiple use of for-est resources (UNDP). When the project ended, they had plant-ed more than 600,000 legume trees to provide fodder for theiranimals. All these actions not only prevented greenhouse gasemissions, they reduced what was once an alarming deforesta-tion rate.

Prevention of land degradation is also an important element ina number of GEF waters projects, including the ongoingBermejo River Basin project, mentioned above, and the Aral SeaBasin project in Central Asia. A new GEF project addresses thedegradation of Africa’s Lake Chad. Surrounded by Cameroon,Central African Republic, Niger, and Nigeria, the lake andwatershed are degrading as demands for land and water reachunsustainable proportions. As many as 35 million people dependon its resources and natural services. The Reversal of Land andWater Degradation Trends in Lake Chad Basin Ecosystem project(UNDP/World Bank) combines $9.9 million of GEF fundingwith $3.3 million from the riparian nations involved to build asystem of basin governance, representing regional agreement onmeasures to manage Lake Chad’s resources. Among other


things, the project will demonstrate improved integrated man-agement of land, water, and ecological resources. This includesstemming desertification and artificially restoring ecologicallyimportant flood flows downstream of dams.

W O R K I N G I N T H E S P I R I T O FA G E N D A 2 1

Agenda 21 recognized that it is not only what nations do toachieve sustainable development, it is how they do it thatensures success. In the spirit of Agenda 21, GEF encouragesapproaches and policies that are known to contribute to sus-tainable outcomes or simply promote equitable results for theworld’s peoples.

Integrating Environment and Development

An adjustment or even a fundamental reshaping of decision-making, in the light of country-specific conditions, may be nec-essary if environment and development is to be put at the centerof economic and political decisionmaking, in effect achieving afull integration of these factors.


First and foremost, environment and development should rein-force—not hinder—each other. Emphasized throughout Agenda21, this fundamental premise now underlies most efforts for theglobal environment, and with good reason. Economic develop-ment cannot long advance by squandering the natural resourcesand systems of the planet. At the same time, people cannotengage in meaningful environmental stewardship if they do nothave the ability to feed, clothe, and shelter their families.



Integrating environment and development has been an essentialtenet of GEF projects in biodiversity, climate change, and inter-national waters alike. Most GEF projects attempt to integratecountry-based activities with national as well as local develop-ment priorities and programs:

■ In Cuba’s Sabana-Camaguey ecosystem, a GEF project(UNDP) produced a comprehensive regional strategicplan identifying major issues affecting sustainable devel-opment and biodiversity conservation as well as policyreforms needed to implement solutions. Particularly suc-cessful was the project’s work with the tourism industryand government toward environmentally sensitive con-struction practices, helping to maintain healthy coral reefsand lagoons on which much of the industry depends.

■ Targeting the Comoé, a highly diverse ecosystem insouthern Burkina Faso and Côte d’Ivoire, the WestAfrican Pilot Community-Based Natural Resources andWildlife Management project (World Bank) is workingto conserve biodiversity by helping communities man-age wildlands and exploit their resources sustainablyand profitably. The project is also working with the twogovernments to develop strategies to increase involve-ment of NGOs and the private sector in implementingnatural resource management.

■ GEF’s Mekong River Basin Water Utilization Project(World Bank) in Southeast Asia is seeking ways to rec-oncile the demands of 65 million inhabitants on a riversystem with globally significant wetlands, floodedforests, and coastline. The project is assisting theMekong River Commission, representing Cambodia,Laos, Thailand, and Vietnam, to promote sustainablewater management, while protecting the basin’s ecological balance.

Encouraging Participation of Stakeholders and Major Social Groups

One of the fundamental prerequisites for the achievement of sustainable development is broad public participation in decisionmaking.


In eastern and central Europe, GEF’s Danube river and Black Seaprojects (UNDP), described earlier, brought together a widerange of national and local stakeholders to protect the basinenvironment. Consultative workshops held twice in each of thesix countries allowed government, industry, and NGO represen-tatives as well as the public to participate in a complex planningeffort. The result was a strong sense of ownership of the processand a strategic action plan to implement in the region.

Public involvement is underscored in no fewer than ten chaptersof Agenda 21, which focus on strengthening the role of certainmajor groups in society in sustainable development, includingmarginalized groups such as women and indigenous groups.GEF believes public involvement is crucial for projects toachieve local, national, and global benefits. This means seekingout all who affect and are affected by project activities andspending time to gain their commitment and participation. In1996, GEF adopted a policy in GEF-financed projects thatacknowledged three means of increasing involvement: informa-tion dissemination, consultations, and stakeholder participa-tion. It went on to state that efforts on public involvementshould be broad, sustainable, and transparent and enhance thesocial, environmental, and financial sustainability of projects.Responsibility for encouraging public involvement should restwith the country itself, supported by implementing agencies,and take into account national and local conditions. Onceenlisted, stakeholders have been known to stay engaged wellafter a project concludes. More than fifty institutions, govern-ment agencies, and NGOs proposed the GEF project on theBermejo river basin in Argentina and Bolivia (UNEP), and manyof these participated in its execution. The project also reachedout to people at the local level, organizing pilot demonstrationprojects, in which communities and local governments in manyparts of the basin participated. This is but one of many exam-ples of GEF projects that involve actors from many levels andstations in life.


At the Grassroots

Involving local communities is a frequent theme in GEF proj-ects, including a number more fully described above. The IndianHilly Hydel project strongly supported community participa-tion. Its success led the government to adopt the participatoryapproach more broadly in developing small-scale hydroelectricpower. GEF’s project for Small Island Developing States (SIDS)in the South Pacific allocated $1.25 million to develop demon-stration community participation subprojects. The East AsianSeas project used participatory rural appraisals and a communi-ty-based management approach in its pilot sites in China andthe Philippines. Three GEF biodiversity projects—in Ghana,Uganda, and the South Pacific—sought to involve local commu-nities by establishing local committees. In Ghana, for example,Local Site Management Committees from five areas near impor-tant coastal wetlands worked with executing agencies to identi-fy problems and priority activities.

GEF projects also encourage the participation of women, indige-nous groups, farmers, NGOs, and local governments:

Women. GEF’s Small Grants Programme, in particular, hasgiven considerable support and attention to the role of womenin sustainable development. Women are often more sensitive tothe impacts of environmental problems on their families.Enhancing their roles and capacities within communities andstrengthening their involvement in community development canhave a sizeable impact on environmental problems.

GEF projects in Honduras, Mozambique, Nepal, Panama, Peru,Uganda, and others have components that speak to women’sneeds. In Honduras, a biodiversity project specifically focusedon the links between natural resource management andwomen’s workloads as well as empowering them throughresource access rights and decisionmaking. The project inPanama targets women for support in generating incomes fromsustainable activities and environmental education. InMozambique, part of a community participation and develop-ment fund is geared toward microenterprise for women’sgroups. A Ugandan project to supply renewable solar energy torural areas provides credit for solar home systems through acredit union–type of women’s trust fund as well as a privaterural development bank.


Indigenous Groups. As of February 2000 GEF had allocated more than $16 million for projects that involved orbenefited indigenous groups in Africa, Asia, and Latin America.

■ The Comoé project in West Africa (World Bank), men-tioned earlier, is involving people from a number of dif-ferent indigenous groups, including the Gur Voltaique,Dioula, and Mande in Burkina Faso and the Manding,Lobi, Palakas, Kong, Bambara, and Senoufo groups inCôte d’Ivoire.

■ The Guyana Program for Sustainable Forestry project(UNDP) found that its close working relationship withindigenous communities was an essential factor in itssuccess. The project led to baselines surveys ofIwokrama rain forest’s flora, fauna, timber, and nontim-ber resources; an operational field station; and estab-lishment of Iwokrama as an international center for rainforest conservation by the Guyanese Parliament.

■ GEF’s project in the Colombian Chocó (UNDP)involved a diverse set of organizations and interests. Inaddition to NGOs, Colombian academia, and two sci-entific research groups, 27 Afro-Colombian grassrootsorganizations and four indigenous group organizationsparticipated in the project’s design and implementation.Bearers of traditional forest knowledge were giveninnovative methodological tools to conduct basic and applied research. The project’s participatoryapproach has become a model for GEF and other institutions’ projects.

■ Farmers. Small farmers in developing countries can bepart of the solution to biodiversity conservation and landdegradation. Enlisting their participation in agrobiodiver-sity projects is appropriate and helpful for project goals.On-farm conservation to protect genetic diversity of wildcrop species is an important component of GEF agrobio-diversity projects in Ethiopia, Turkey, and the FertileCrescent (Lebanon, Jordan, and Syria).

Strategic Partnerships

As demonstrated by several projects already described, many ofGEF’s largest projects entail complex collaboration among gov-ernments, NGOs, scientific and technical organizations, and theprivate sector. Multisector and multi-institutional partnerships


were and are the basis for most GEF river basin and major waterbody projects, such as the East Asian Seas project. Others, suchas the Cuba Sabana-Camaguey project, bring government,NGOs, and the private sector together to address shared envi-ronmental concerns.

UNEP implements several GEF projects that bring togethernational governments, NGOs, and research institutions. Boththe Biodiversity Country Studies and Economics of GreenhouseGas Limitations projects organized country teams to conductresearch and build collaboration and stakeholder ownership onbiodiversity conservation and climate change in a number ofcountries and regions.

NGOs, the scientific and technological community, and businessand industry all play important roles in GEF work:

NGOs. Agenda 21 specifically identifies NGOs for an expand-ed role in sustainable development. Today, about 680 nationaland local NGOs have helped or are helping to prepare projectconcepts and to implement numerous GEF projects. At the grass-roots, NGOs play a critical role by helping to assure integrationof the needs and priorities of local stakeholders into projectdesign and identifying and testing innovative approaches.

NGOs are important intermediaries in GEF’s Small andMedium-Size Enterprise Program, implemented by theInternational Finance Corporation. To date, two internationalNGOs—Conservation International and World Wildlife Fund—and a number of local NGOs have made loans to small entre-preneurs at long-term low interest rates. This helps finance smalland innovative businesses that address biodiversity conservationand climate change concerns.

GEF projects use various mechanisms to facilitate NGO partic-ipation. Brazil’s Sáo Francisco Basin project, for example,formed subcommittees headed by NGOs to address variouscomponents of the project. The NGO Danube Forum compris-es more than 100 regional and national NGOs, coordinated byIUCN, World Wildlife Fund, and REC. Funds channeledthrough the forum have gone to some fifty NGOs working onrelated project goals. More than a dozen GEF-supported con-servation trust funds factor NGOs into leadership positions andfoster ongoing partnerships with community-based groups.

Scientific and technological community. Facilitating the contri-butions of scientists, engineers, architects, policymakers, andother professionals to environment and development needs little


justification. Agenda 21 calls for their involvement with deci-sionmakers and stakeholders to “deepen into a full partnership”through improved communication and cooperation andstrengthened ethical codes of practice and guidelines.

GEF’s 12-member Scientific and Technical Advisory Panel(STAP) provides scientific and technical advice on GEF policies,operational strategies, programs, and research priorities. Amajor new emphasis has been to reach out to the wider scientificcommunity, particularly to tap the scientific expertise of GEFproject countries.

GEF is working to improve the capacity of developing countriesin sciences related to the global environment, including helpingmore than 120 countries draft national strategies and actionplans on biodiversity and climate change through enablingactivities described above. The UNEP Global WatersAssessment, supported by GEF, is helping scientific communitiesin developing countries to assess and plan for management oftheir water resources. Similar global assessments include theGlobal Biodiversity Assessment and the Regionally Based GlobalAssessment of Persistent Toxic Substances. Individual projectsoften involve local scientists. GEF’s Colombian Chocó project,for example, involved academics from six universities and twoscientific research groups.

Business and industry. Private capital flows to developing coun-tries are now five times greater than official development assis-tance. Business choices could impact the environment throughair and water pollution, ozone-depleting substances and green-house gases, deforestation, and land degradation. The immenseresources, know-how, and drive of the private sector could beharnessed for sustainable development. This would provide anengine for sustaining and replicating global environmentalprojects.

Agenda 21 urges involving businesses and industries as full par-ticipants in implementing and evaluating activities that promotecleaner production and responsible entrepreneurship. Almost allGEF projects involve the private sector as project developers,implementers and financers; as sources of goods, services, andnew technologies; or as vehicles for technology distribution. In1999, the GEF Council approved ways of encouraging a greaterengagement with the private sector. These include ongoingefforts to remove barriers to the creation of, entry to, or trans-


formation of markets that support global environmental objec-tives; a range of non-grant financing modalities; alternativebankable feasibility studies; and longer term partnerships.

In Batangas Bay, Philippines, GEF’s East Asian Seas project (UNDP) included the private sector in framing majorpolicies in managing the area’s deepwater port. The project alsoactively developed private/public partnerships, especially inwaste management. Significantly, the private sector, representedby the Batangas Coastal Resources Management Foundation,gained a seat on the newly created Batangas Bay RegionEnvironmental Protection Council, alongside various govern-ment and nongovernmental members. Membership spurred thefoundation to take decisive action to, among others, developmanagement and action plans addressing pollution, coordinateindustry-government agreements for voluntary waste reduction,and supply equipment and expertise in oil spill response exercises.

■ In Brazil, all stakeholders, including private timberoperators, actively participated in developing GEF’sPromoting Biodiversity Conservation and SustainableUse project, cofinanced by Peugeot and Banco Axial. InVenezuela, GEF’s Conservation of Biological Diversityin the Orinoco Delta Biosphere Reserve project receivedfunds from two large investors, Petroleos de Venezuelaand the Corporacion Venezolana de Guyana and thecooperation of the palmito industry.

■ Two GEF projects in China transferred western technol-ogy on energy-efficient refrigerators and industrial boil-ers through the private sector. Around the globe, hun-dreds of thousands of compact fluorescent lamps havereplaced less-efficient incandescent bulbs, channeledthrough private suppliers with incentives providedthrough GEF projects. GEF projects are removing barri-ers to expanding markets in renewable energy sources,such as solar, wind, geothermal, and biomass, and devel-oping new markets, such as for environmental servicesprovided by forest ecosystems in Costa Rica.


Enabling People To Build a Sustainable Future

The ability of a country to follow sustainable development pathsis determined to a large extent by the capacity of its people andits institutions as well as by its ecological and geographical con-ditions… the need to strengthen national capacities is shared byall countries.


The countries that work with GEF and its implementing agen-cies come to projects with widely varying capacities. To buildownership and sustainability, people and institutions must gainthe skills and abilities needed to do much of the work them-selves. Agenda 21 recognizes capacity development as crucial toimplementing its program. This includes training, institutionstrengthening, the transfer of technology, education, and aware-ness campaigns, all GEF priorities.

Training. Since 1991, GEF has conducted hundreds of work-shops, courses, study tours, and other training events.

■ The Cuba Sabana-Camaguey coastal project (UNDP)trained 500 people in fields related to geographic infor-mation systems, biodiversity, environmental research,among others.

■ GEF’s biodiversity conservation project in Vietnam(UNDP) arranged short-term international scholarshipsand study tours for various professionals.

■ A pollution control project for Africa’s LakeTanganyika (UNDP) conducted numerous courses infishing practices, environmental education methods,GIS, and underwater surveying.

■ Financial and economic analysis and feasibility studieson energy-efficient Russian residential buildings was thefocus of training for heating, gas, and other local busi-nesses by one GEF project (UNDP).

■ The Asia Least Cost Greenhouse Gas AbatementStrategies (ALGAS) project (UNDP) extensively trainedscientists and others in 12 participating states on quan-tifying and inventorying greenhouse gas emissions, iden-tifying ways to reduce emissions or enhance sinks, anddevelop national policies and plans.

Institution strengthening. This can involve both improving theabilities of existing institutions or creating new institutions orstructures.


For instance, the Indian Renewable Energy DevelopmentAgency (IREDA) received assistance from a GEF project (WorldBank) to strengthen its ability to promote and finance privatesector investments in wind power. GEF’s Small GrantsProgramme has had notable success in strengthening NGOs andcommunity-based organizations, which improve their ability toprepare viable proposals, plan for community participation, man-age financial resources, and meet donor reporting requirements.GEF’s Thailand Electricity Efficiency and West Africa BuildingEnergy Efficiency (both World Bank), and several other GEFprojects helped strengthen regulatory frameworks through, forexample, design, implementation, and enforcement of buildingcodes and standards.

Sometimes, institution strengthening involves creating entirelynew institutions or networks. In Belize, a GEF project broughttogether a number of government agencies dealing with coastalzones under one agency, and the Gulf of Guinea project inAfrica built an electronic network of 350 managers and scien-tists on matters relating to ecosystem degradation, socioeco-nomic impacts, and management measures to improve environ-mental quality and livelihoods. New types of credit mechanismsare featured in a number of GEF renewable energy projects,and, as noted above, thirteen conservation trust funds were cre-ated with GEF support.

Transfer of technology. Technology transfer is a central elementin climate change projects, many of which have already beendescribed. GEF projects in this focal area often install anddemonstrate equipment, such as solar home systems, compactfluorescent lamps, and more efficient motors, to inspire expand-ed installation by others. Many of these projects are the first oftheir kind in the country concerned. GEF’s ALGAS project,described earlier, is supporting research on renewable energyapplications that show promise for reducing long-term technol-ogy costs.

GEF’s program to eliminate use of ozone-depleting substancesalso turned to new technologies to remedy the situation. Itsprojects in the Czech Republic, Hungary, Slovenia, and othersphased out chlorofluorocarbons by substituting low and non-ozone-depleting foam technologies, for example. A new initia-tive in Thailand supports introduction of energy-efficient airconditioners that use ozone layer–friendlier substances.


Education and awareness. To know is to understand, and withunderstanding comes support and action. For this reason, GEFprojects invariably include education and awareness compo-nents. Public awareness campaigns, classroom education, andpublic information meetings all serve to build an environment in which GEF projects can thrive, as well as raise interest indoing more.

The Jordan Dana Reserve and Lebanon Protected Areas Projectsboth credit public awareness raising with enhancing the overallenabling environment for their work. In Tunisia, consumerslearned about solar hot water heating through a GEF-financedpromotional campaign, and consumer education and outreachprograms in Jamaica, Mexico, and Poland were essential toincreased sales of compact fluorescent lamps. The East AsianSeas project found that strengthening public awareness helped itmaintain transparency and continuity in future actions.Replication of integrated coastal management has begun atthree sites in China and is planned for three in the Philippines.

Building a Supportive Broader Context

One of GEF’s strengths is its ability to step back and look at thewhole. What broad assistance do countries need to design andimplement successful projects? Where do gaps exist in scientificor technical knowledge helpful to sustainable development?How can projects better address their concerns? GEF funds anumber of global projects that build international or regionalscientific capacity in support of country efforts. The followingefforts help fulfill three of Agenda 21’s stated priorities:

Cooperation for capacity building. GEF has learned that capac-ity development is more than merely conducting workshops andtransferring equipment. It is a complex process of organization-al change and innovation, requiring growth and change in indi-viduals, organizations, and institutions alike. To be effective, theprocess requires careful assessment of capacity needs and broadinterventions over a lengthy period of time. In recent years, GEFbegan to question whether the experience it had gained in thisarea warranted a more comprehensive, programmatic approachto improve its country-level impact.

In fiscal 1999, the GEF Council approved a strategic partnershipwith UNDP—called the Capacity Development Initiative—todevelop a comprehensive approach to building country capaci-


ties. Over 18 months, the effort is considering lessons learned inGEF projects as well as experiences from GEF’s three imple-menting agencies and other partners. It will address in particu-lar the interrelationships among individuals, institutions, andoverall systems. The goal is to develop a strategic approach tocapacity development that is firmly rooted in the reality ofdeveloping countries and a new, comprehensive GEF interven-tion that more effectively assists countries in developing globalenvironmental capacities at all levels.

Science for sustainable development. “Scientific knowledgeshould be applied to articulate and support the goals of sustain-able development through scientific assessments of current con-ditions and future prospects for the Earth system.”6 Three majorGEF-funded UNEP projects help fulfill this point in Agenda 21.The Global Biodiversity Assessment, completed in 1995, com-piled and analyzed, for the first time, current knowledge on themain issues in global biodiversity. This state-of-the-art, inde-pendent, peer-reviewed scientific analysis provides a standardscientific reference, helping policymakers, scientists, and NGOsbetter contribute to conservation and management of the plan-et’s biological wealth. Its development also strengthened a net-work of scientific experts from a variety of disciplines. TheGlobal International Waters Assessment and Regionally BasedGlobal Assessment of Persistent Toxic Substances projects, nowunder way, are intended to provide the same kind of basis forimproved scientific understanding in international waters andtoxic substances.

GEF goes beyond such assessments to develop methodologiesfor scientists in developing countries to use in conducting biodi-versity and climate change country studies and assessments.GEF also funded a UNEP project to establish a methodologicalframework for climate change mitigation assessment in itsEconomics of Greenhouse Gas Limitations Project.

Other GEF research projects seek to find scientific solutions toproblems faced the world over. UNDP’s GEF-fundedAlternatives to Slash and Burn Project assembled scientists ineight benchmark institutions to find alternatives to this destruc-tive agricultural practice. Participants standardized methodolo-gies as well as assessing biophysical and socioeconomic charac-teristics, analyzing impacts, and increasing awareness of alter-natives. Another GEF project is looking at the threat to nativebiodiversity posed by invasive exotic species in eight countries


(UNEP). The objective is to determine best practices in recog-nizing, evaluating, and mitigating invasive species threats byexamining current tools and approaches.

Information for decisionmaking. As Agenda 21 points out,everyone uses and provides information. From decisionmakersat the national level to those at the grassroots, data, experience,and knowledge are all essential to sustainable development.Agenda 21 emphasizes the need to bridge data gaps andimprove the availability of information. Several GEF projects dojust that:

■ UNEP’s Country Case Studies on Sources and Sinks ofGreenhouse Gases project, funded through GEF, pro-vided the greenhouse gas inventory data required bycountries to determine where action would provide themost effective results.

■ The Biodiversity Data Management Project (UNEP)collaborated with the World Conservation MonitoringCentre to finance surveys of sources of biodiversitydata, creating information networks, and develop biodi-versity data management plans in ten countries.

■ A recent $750,000 GEF grant will fund a technologytransfer clearinghouse to redirect commercial invest-ment decisions to cleaner technologies (UNEP). Theproject’s appraisal services will help loan officers evalu-ate applications for efficient or renewable energy proj-ects, assuring that they are carefully targeted to privatesector borrowers and their lenders.


A D D R E S S I N G T H E H U M A NC O N D I T I O N

GEF’s program is grounded in promoting a sustainable qualityof life for people and communities. Directly or indirectly GEFprojects cut across issues of immediate concern to people—poverty, disease, local pollution, and so on—and whose allevia-tion is emphasized in Agenda 21.

Poverty

The eradication of poverty and hunger, greater equity in incomedistribution and human resources development remain majorchallenges everywhere. The struggle against poverty is theshared responsibility of all countries.


GEF projects address poverty in a number of ways, among oth-ers, by promoting sustainable agriculture and rural develop-ment; providing microcredit; preventing land degradation andprotecting natural resources for sustainable use; protecting cropspecies; and extending renewable energy and lowering its cost tocommunities.

GEF projects help local people identify and/or adopt newapproaches and alternative livelihoods that sustain the environ-ment, while maintaining or improving their standard of living.Coastal zone management in Belize, supported by GEF, is begin-ning to restore stocks of commercially important species, suchas lobster, conch, and other reef fish, that sustain local fisheries.A GEF project helped find new trades for carvers of the shells ofthe endangered hawksbill turtle in the Seychelles and encour-aged small businesses in fruit, herb, and honey products har-vested sustainably from Jordan’s Dana Reserve.

An independent review of climate change projects, commis-sioned by GEF, concluded that its efforts in this arena wereachieving “important development benefits.” GEF’s RenewableEnergy project in Ghana, for example, targeted some of thepoorest households in the northern part of the country to receiverenewable energy-based electricity services at an affordable cost


(UNDP). GEF’s roughly twenty off-grid solar photovoltaic proj-ects all promote rural development by stimulating commercial-ization of solar PV, expanding access to this renewable energy.

GEF biodiversity projects often include components for povertyreduction. A new project in Morocco (UNDP) to conserve glob-ally significant biodiversity in the Southern High AtlasMountains, for example, is studying ways to intensify agricul-ture to increase production, while reducing impacts on impor-tant biodiversity. The project has also partnered with the localNGO NEF to introduce improved stoves, train women in pri-mary health care, and promote sustainable ways to generateincome in Ouarzazate Province, which includes three villages inthe project zone.

The community-based conservation approach of GEF forestryprojects implemented by the World Bank helps address the highincidence of poverty usually found in buffer zone communities,although the results are not easy to measure. One-third of its 44forestry projects explicitly include poverty reduction as a proj-ect justification. Approaches usually include finding sustainable,low-impact alternatives for generating income in these commu-nities, such as ecotourism and harvesting nontimber forest prod-ucts on a sustainable basis.

GEF’s Small Grants Programme funds community-based activi-ties that address local aspects of global environmental chal-lenges in 46 countries around the world. Grants specifically tar-get poor, rural communities in which livelihoods depend direct-ly on the natural resource base.

Health

Health and development are intimately interconnected. Bothinsufficient development leading to poverty and inappropriatedevelopment resulting in overconsumption, coupled with anexpanding world population, can result in severe environmentalhealth problems in both developing and developed nations.


Poverty is closely linked with prospects for human health, andenvironmental problems have a direct impact on both.Environmental health issues, however, are not restricted topoverty-stricken areas in developing countries. Air and waterpollution and contamination of the land can affect human pop-


ulations across the board, leading to respiratory and waterbornediseases and possibly long-term impacts on human immune sys-tems, reproduction, and development. In addition, scientists arenow assessing the current and potential impacts of globalatmospheric changes on human health; these could be diverseand severe.

Water pollution. GEF is helping reduce health risks from waterpollution in both rural and urban areas. Central to a number ofmajor GEF international waters projects is reducing pollutionfrom industrial and municipal wastes and agricultural runoff,which threaten water for drinking and other purposes. TheBlack Sea project to implement a strategic action plan identifiedand quantified all sources of pollution and sought to harmonizewater quality standards. GEF’s Danube River efforts addressedurban wastewater, solid waste, and agricultural runoff prob-lems. In Africa, a project for the Gulf of Guinea large marineecosystem formulated a program for pollution control and setup demonstration sites for waste reuse and recycling. Reducingship-generated waste is the focus of two projects in theCaribbean, and Small Island Developing States in the Pacific areintegrating land and water resource management to protectdrinking water supplies.

Air pollution. Projects that reduce emissions of greenhouse gasesor ozone-depleting substances help reduce local levels of air pol-lutants as well:

■ The Efficient Industrial Boilers project in China (WorldBank) is adapting high-efficiency foreign technologies tocoal-fired industrial boilers in certain urban areas,reducing emissions of pollution. Not only will thisreduce greenhouse gas emissions, residents will breathehealthier air. Once proved successful, the technologieswill be introduced to many more Chinese cities.

■ The Poland Efficient Lighting project (World Bank/IFC)reduced emissions from coal-fired generation plants byover 600,000 (CK) metric tons, again reducing atmos-pheric emissions as well as local air pollution.

■ GEF projects that introduce more efficient cook stovesalso help reduce indoor air pollution directly improvinghousehold health.


Persistent toxic substances. GEF has taken a special interest in thehealth impacts of pesticides, industrial chemicals, and unwantedby-products of industrial processes or combustion. These sub-stances accumulate in the food chain and may act as “endocrinedisrupters,” suppressing immune systems and affecting repro-ductive and developmental systems. GEF has funded prepara-tion of a number of projects addressing sources of persistentorganic pollutants, mercury, and pesticides (DDT). These effortsinclude the Regionally Based Global Assessment of PersistentToxic Substances project to provide guidance and set regionalpriorities and Reducing Pesticide Runoff in the Caribbean.Others concern alternatives to DDT for vector control in Mexicoand Central America, country case studies in persistent toxic sub-stances, and persistent organic pollutants as they relate to foodscarcity and indigenous groups in Arctic Russia.

Environmental safety issues. Safety is another factor in humanhealth that is also addressed in some GEF projects. The ChinaCoal-Bed Methane project (UNDP), for example, is introducingtechnology to capture methane released during coal mining asan energy source. Side benefits include helping prevent under-ground mine explosions and providing a clean source of energyfor household use.

Atmospheric change. GEF’s and others’ work to moderate cli-mate change and protect the ozone layer has global ramifica-tions on long-term prospects for human health. A 1997 GEFreview of the environmental health dimensions of these atmos-pheric challenges concluded that overall health effects “are likelyto be wide-ranging and negative.”7 Direct impacts, such as skincancer, cataracts, and injuries from more severe storms, floods,and forest fires, are likely to be far outweighed by indirectimpacts, the report stated. These include, but are not limited to,impaired food production exacerbating malnutrition in vulner-able populations, increased diarrheal disease due to changes inwater quantity and quality, and the spread of infectious diseasesinto new geographic locations. New diseases may emerge andthose once controlled or eliminated may re-emerge, even in developed countries. Significantly, new research shows thatthe combined health effects of common pollutants can be1,000 times stronger than they are individually.


C L O S I N G

Agenda 21 is a dynamic programme. It will be carried out by thevarious actors according to the different situations, capacitiesand priorities of countries and regions in full respect of all theprinciples contained in the Rio Declaration on Environment andDevelopment. It could evolve over time in the light of changingneeds and circumstances. This process marks the beginning of anew global partnership for sustainable development.

—Preamble, Agenda 21

Global environmental protection and the pursuit of sustainabledevelopment are not just a matter of money or even well-designed projects. What makes or breaks these efforts is people:outstanding project managers, dynamic community-basedorganizations and community groups, dedicated public servantsin research institutes, government ministries, and policymakingbodies, scientists and business leaders determined to play theirpart to the best of their abilities.

In her preface to Our Common Future, Norway’s former primeminister Gro Harlem Brundtland wrote, “Perhaps our mosturgent task today is to persuade nations of the need to return tomultilateralism.” These words are just as true today as theywere in 1987. The ongoing challenge has been to marshal thewill to translate scientific and technological understanding intoeconomically feasible, and politically achievable, actions thatbenefit people in all nations.

It is clear, however, that governments alone can’t get the jobdone. It is only through an alliance of institutions that the req-uisite “sea change” in local, national, regional, and global poli-cies can come about. The GEF is attempting to accelerate thecreation and evolution of these partnerships within and amongits 166 member nations, its implementing agencies (UNDP,UNEP, the World Bank), regional development banks, morethan 500 collaborating non-governmental organizations, thescientific community, and the numerous business enterprisesincreasingly needed to carry solutions far and wide.


In sum, GEF’s success since Rio is due to a number of institu-tional as well as operational factors, specifically:

■ Its ability to translate vision and concepts into viable actions;

Its unique role as a catalyst for sustainable developmentwhile respecting national priorities;

■ Its role in support of the Rio Conventions, theConvention on Biological Diversity, the U.N.Framework Convention on Climate Change and theDesertification Convention;

■ The institutional arrangement of a small and efficiententity that relies on existing, proven organizations forimplementing its actions on the ground;

■ Its demonstration of new and renewable energy technologies in collaboration with the private sector,specifically for developing countries;

■ Its integrated approaches for land, water, and biodiver-sity conservation;

■ The many tangible partnerships with NGOs, govern-ments, and the private sector.

GEF pursues this agenda with a sense of urgency and the under-standing that humanity is, more than ever, truly racing againstthe clock. With innovation and efficiency, the threat of global climate change can be reversed in the 21st century.International waters problems, particularly the over-exploitationof living resources, can be reversed in decades. If countries con-tinue to do away with ozone-depleting chemicals, the protectiveshield that stands between us and the sun’s damaging rays couldheal itself by 2050. Much can be done to save earth’s diversityfor future generations and better use resources to benefit manymore people in the decades ahead. As a principal actor in thenew global alliance for sustainable development and protectionof our global commons, the GEF will continue to lead the way.

–Prepared by Pamela S. Cubberly


N O T E S

1. Agenda 21, pp. 250–51.

2. Ecologic. November 1999. Study of Impacts of GEF Activities on Phase-Out ofOzone-Depleting Substances: GEF Evaluation Report.

GEF. 1998. Project Performance Report. Washington, D.C.

——. 1998. Study of GEF’s Overall Performance. Washington, D.C.

——. 1999. Project Performance Report. Washington, D.C.

——. N.D. “An Interim Assessment of Biodiversity Enabling Activities:National Biodiversity Strategies and Action Plans.” Washington, D.C.

Porter, G., R. Clémençon, W. Ofosu-Amaah, and M. Philips. 1998. Study ofGEF’s Overall Performance. Global Environment Facility, Washington, D.C.

The World Bank. 1994. Global Environment Facility: Independent Evaluationof the Pilot Phase. Washington, D.C.

3. Ecologic. 1999. Study of Impacts of GEF Activities on Phase-Out of Ozone-Depleting Substances: GEF Evaluation Report.

4. Study of Impacts of GEF Activities on Phase-Out of Ozone-DepletingSubstances. p. 13.

5. Agenda 21, chapter 15, p. 131.6. Agenda 21, Chapter 35, p. 257.

7. James A. Listorti. June 1997. “The Environmental Health Dimensions ofClimate Change and Ozone Depletion.” Global Environment Facility,Washington, D.C. p. iv.


Date post:	31-Mar-2016
Category:	Documents
Upload:	global-environment-facility
View:	215 times
Download:	0 times

GEF Contributions to Agenda 21: The First Decade

Documents